MAY_From the foundation
From the Foundation Why Good Research Is Not Enough In recent issues, we explored how preventable harm occurs in clinical care and why scientific evidence must guide safer prescribing. Yet an equally important question remains: what happens when that evidence is never effectively communicated? It is a common assumption that once a study is completed, the work is done. Many health studies end as “data in a drawer.” They are conducted, analysed, and written, but never published or shared in ways that allow others to use them. Evidence cannot influence care if it is invisible. A well-designed study may offer a solution to a critical health problem, but if the clinician at the point of care is unaware of it, its impact is lost. The gap between research and practice is therefore not only about generating evidence, but about ensuring that it is accessible, understandable, and applied. Closing this gap requires more than producing new knowledge. It requires strengthening how research is communicated, shared, and translated into real-world decision-making. Without this, even the best science remains disconnected from patient care. Event Spotlight Why Research Visibility Matters in Healthcare When we talk about research visibility, we are referring to the barriers that prevent scientific knowledge from reaching those who need it most. One major challenge is unpublished research. Studies are often shared only when the results are positive or exciting. However, knowing that a treatment does not work is equally important. When such findings remain unpublished, other researchers may repeat the same ineffective approaches, wasting time, resources, and opportunities for progress. Another barrier is limited access to scientific literature. Much of the world’s research is locked behind subscription paywalls. For many healthcare professionals, especially in resource-limited settings, paying to access a single article is not feasible. As a result, valuable knowledge remains out of reach for those working closest to patients. There is also the challenge of poor dissemination. Research findings often remain confined to academic journals and conferences. Without translating this knowledge into accessible formats, such as policy briefs, training materials, or clinical summaries, the information does not reach frontline healthcare providers or decision-makers. Improving research visibility is therefore not simply about publication; it is about ensuring that knowledge moves beyond academic spaces and informs practice. When research is visible, it can guide safer treatment decisions, improve outcomes, and strengthen healthcare systems. Medicine Safety Insight Why Poor Documentation Leads to Unsafe Care Patient safety depends not only on the medicines prescribed, but on the quality of the information that accompanies them. When documentation is incomplete or inconsistent, the healthcare system becomes vulnerable to error. A patient’s medical record is more than a file; it is a continuous account of their treatment history. If key details are missing, the next healthcare provider may make decisions based on incomplete information. One of the most common risks is incomplete records. Missing information about previous treatments, allergies, or existing conditions can lead to inappropriate prescribing or harmful drug interactions. Another critical issue is the underreporting of adverse drug reactions. When side effects are not documented or reported, important safety signals are lost. This prevents healthcare systems from learning and increases the likelihood that other patients will experience the same harm. Poor documentation also leads to weak clinical decision-making. Healthcare professionals rely on accurate data to make informed choices. When records are unclear, outdated, or incomplete, decisions become less reliable, increasing the risk of treatment failure or adverse outcomes. Improving documentation practices is therefore essential for the rational use of medicine. Clear, accurate, and consistent records ensure that the right patient receives the right treatment at the right time: safely. Research & Innovation Watch Open Science and the Future of Accessible Research A growing movement in healthcare, known as Open Science, is challenging traditional models of research access. Open Science promotes the idea that research should be freely available to everyone. Instead of restricting access through paywalls, it encourages the sharing of data, methods, and findings so that knowledge can be used widely and efficiently. This approach has significant implications for global health. When research is openly accessible, a student, clinician, or policymaker anywhere in the world can access the same information. This reduces inequality in access to knowledge and accelerates scientific progress. Open Science also improves transparency and collaboration. By making data and methods available, researchers can validate findings, build on existing work, and avoid duplication. This leads to more efficient use of resources and faster translation of knowledge into practice. However, the success of Open Science depends on systems that support quality, accountability, and responsible data use. Open access alone is not enough; it must be accompanied by strong research standards and clear communication. Ultimately, Open Science represents a shift in how knowledge is viewed, not as a private resource, but as a shared foundation for improving health outcomes. Training & Capacity Building Publishing Research and Using Reference Managers Ensuring that science reaches the clinic requires more than generating evidence—it requires building the skills to communicate and organise that evidence effectively. This month, QPHRF focuses on strengthening practical skills in two key areas: Publishing ResearchParticipants are guided through the process of preparing research for publication, including structuring a manuscript, responding to peer review, and selecting appropriate journals. Publishing ensures that research becomes part of the global evidence base and can inform practice beyond the original study setting. Reference ManagementEffective research writing depends on accurate and organised referencing. Tools such as Zotero and Mendeley help researchers manage large volumes of literature, organise citations, and generate bibliographies efficiently. These tools improve the quality, credibility, and reproducibility of research. By strengthening these skills, healthcare professionals and researchers are better equipped to ensure that their work is visible, accessible, and impactful. Upcoming Webinar Publishing Research and Using Reference Managers for Effective Literature Search and Referencing Planning to publish your research or improve how you manage references? This practical session will cover: Date: TBC This webinar is ideal for clinicians, postgraduate students, and early-career researchers preparing theses,
April_Upcoming Webinar
Upcoming Webinar Publishing Research and Using Reference Managers for Effective Literature Search and Referencing Planning to publish your research or struggling with managing references effectively? This practical webinar will focus on: 🗓 Thursday, 28 May 2026⏰ 7.45 PM This session is particularly useful for clinicians, postgraduate students, and early-career researchers working on theses, dissertations, or journal submissions. ➡ Register here
April_Research & Innovation Watch
Research & Innovation Watch Emerging ideas shaping the future of safer treatment and patient care When Artificial Intelligence Finds What Research Missed For many people living with rare diseases, the biggest challenge is often not the lack of research, but their inability to utilise the knowledge that already exists. Over decades, thousands of laboratory studies and clinical observations have been published across journals and archives. However, the sheer volume of information has become so extensive that no individual researcher or clinical team can realistically review, connect, and interpret it all. Artificial intelligence is beginning to transform this. By analysing large and complex collections of biomedical data, researchers have identified previously overlooked drug candidates that could benefit certain conditions, including rare neurological diseases. In some cases, AI systems have recognised patterns in existing research and pinpointed compounds that had been studied before but not fully understood or utilised. The significance lies not only in the specific discoveries but also in the process itself — these systems are helping to reveal meaning in information that already exists. This highlights a broader change in healthcare research: progress does not always arise from generating more data, but from gaining a better understanding of and utilising the data we already possess. In clinical practice, this ability has significant implications. AI systems can analyse electronic health records, identify subtle links between medications and adverse outcomes, and recognise patient groups at greater risk of complications. In some cases, these tools have uncovered drug interactions or safety signals that were not previously identified through traditional research methods. If effectively incorporated into healthcare systems, such technologies could assist clinicians by: However, these tools are not substitutes for clinical judgement. Their usefulness relies on how they are implemented, interpreted, and incorporated into existing healthcare systems. At its core, this innovation reveals a challenge that goes beyond technology. Across healthcare systems, valuable safety signals, treatment patterns, and clinical lessons are often found in routine data but remain underused. The gap between knowledge and patient care is not always scientific — it is informational. This is why it is vital to strengthen how healthcare systems learn from data. Pharmacovigilance, documentation, and research translation all share the same goal: to ensure information does not stay in reports and archives, but contributes to everyday clinical decisions. The lesson is straightforward but impactful: medical breakthroughs are not always concealed in the future — sometimes they lie in the past. As these tools continue to develop, they may assist clinicians in making better-informed decisions, promote safer prescribing, and reduce the time from knowledge to effective patient care. Innovation in healthcare is not only about discovering new treatments, but it is also about truly understanding and applying the knowledge we already possess.
April_Medicine Safety Insight
Medicine Safety Insight Evidence-Based Prescribing: Why Guidelines Matter One of the most effective ways to ensure that science benefits patients is through the consistent application of clinical guidelines in daily prescribing. Clinical guidelines are developed to support healthcare professionals in making informed, consistent, and safe treatment decisions. They are based on comprehensive evaluation of research evidence, expert consensus, and real-world clinical data. Nevertheless, guidelines are only effective when actively applied. In many clinical environments, prescribing choices may still depend on habit, prior training, or incomplete information rather than updated guidance. This can cause variations in care and raise the risk of adverse drug reactions, treatment failure, or unnecessary medication use. Evidence-based prescribing ensures that: Importantly, guidelines are not strict rules; they are tools to support clinical judgement. When combined with patient-specific considerations, they assist clinicians in providing care that is both personalised and scientifically valid. Enhancing access to guidelines, promoting ongoing professional development, and incorporating decision-support tools into clinical routines are vital measures for safer prescribing practices.
April_Event Spotlight
Event Spotlight World Health Day — Why Science Must Reach the Clinic Observed each April globally Observed each April worldwide, World Health Day emphasises urgent issues in global health and reminds us that better outcomes need more than just awareness — they require evidence-based action. Across healthcare systems, one of the most persistent challenges is not the lack of scientific knowledge, but the inconsistent application of it. Clinical research offers clear guidance on effective treatments, proper dosing, and risk reduction strategies. However, patients do not always benefit from these advances. In routine practice, variations in prescribing, limited adherence to guidelines, and delayed updates to clinical protocols can cause avoidable complications. This gap has real consequences. A patient may receive a medicine that is no longer considered first-line therapy, a dose that does not reflect current evidence, or a combination of drugs with known risks. These are not rare or dramatic failures; they are everyday occurrences that build up across healthcare systems and significantly contribute to patient harm. Joining our voices with World Health Day, we emphasise a key message: improving health outcomes depends on science not being limited to journals and conferences but actively guiding clinical decisions. When research is applied to practice, it enhances patient safety, increases treatment effectiveness, and eases the burden on healthcare systems. Bridging the gap between evidence and practice is not only a scientific challenge — it is a patient safety priority.
April_From the Foundation
From the Foundation From Preventing Harm to Applying Evidence in Practice In our March issue, we explored how preventable medicine-related harm contributes to serious illness and why safer prescribing must begin before patients reach intensive care. This month, we take that conversation further — focusing on a closely related challenge: ensuring that the scientific evidence guiding safer care is consistently applied in everyday clinical practice. Modern medicine is built on an ever-expanding body of scientific knowledge. Each year, thousands of studies are published, new therapies are introduced, and clinical guidelines are updated to reflect the latest evidence. However, within everyday healthcare settings, a crucial gap remains — the disconnect between what research indicates and what patients actually receive. Scientific discovery alone does not improve patient outcomes. Its impact depends on whether it is correctly interpreted, effectively communicated, and consistently applied in real clinical environments. In many cases, preventable harm occurs not because evidence is unavailable, but because it is not fully integrated into practice. Outdated prescribing habits, limited access to current guidelines, and time constraints in busy clinical settings all contribute to this gap. At the Qua Pillar Health Research Foundation (QPHRF), our focus is on bridging this gap. We emphasise transforming research into practical decisions — ensuring that evidence guides prescribing, monitoring, and patient management in significant ways. Safer healthcare isn’t just about producing new knowledge; it’s about how effectively existing knowledge is applied.
Training & Capacity Building
Building safer healthcare systems requires more than guidelines and publications. Healthcare professionals must be equipped with practical skills to apply evidence in real clinical settings — from recognising adverse drug reactions to designing research that answers relevant patient-care questions. Through webinars, workshops, and student training programs, the Qua Pillar Health Research Foundation (QPHRF) supports clinicians, pharmacists, and early-career researchers in developing competencies in pharmacovigilance, rational use of medicines, and research methodology. Upcoming Webinar Research Designs for Health-Related Studies: Choosing the Right Study Design Before You Collect Patients’ Data Planning a thesis, audit, or publication in health sciences? This practical session focuses on selecting the appropriate study design to address a research question before data collection begins — a critical step that determines whether findings will be valid, publishable, and useful for patient care. 🗓 Thursday, 26 March 2026⏰ Webinar begins: 8:30 PM WAT (Room opens 8:15 PM WAT) Speaker:Dr Adebanjo Adegbola — Reader & Pharmaceutical Scientist, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria.Dr Adegbola conducts research on drug disposition and treatment outcomes in vulnerable populations, particularly children and pregnant women. His work has contributed to improved understanding of malaria treatment and prevention strategies. He has received multiple competitive fellowships and grants, including EDCTP fellowships, training at the Centre for Medical Parasitology and Immunology, University of Copenhagen, and an Applied Pharmacometrics Fellowship (Pharmacometrics Africa/Certara University). He has also led research on Plasmodium falciparum surveillance and supervised undergraduate and postgraduate researchers. Moderator:Dr Onyinye Akunne — Qua Pillar Health Research Foundation Who should attend?Clinicians, pharmacists, resident doctors, postgraduate students (MPH/MSc/PhD), and early-career researchers preparing a protocol or planning data collection. Registration:https://forms.gle/YT9J958FTaLk7DxF9 Please share with colleagues and trainees who may benefit.
Research & Innovation Watch
Digital Twins: Predicting Treatment Before It Is Given One of the long-standing challenges in clinical care is that treatments are developed using population averages, whereas real patients differ widely in age, physiology, and comorbidities. When starting therapy, clinicians often need to monitor and adjust treatment over time to find the most appropriate dose for an individual patient. We see the consequences across healthcare systems. Some hospital admissions occur not because a disease worsened, but because a medicine caused an adverse drug reaction. In many cases, clinicians are not making poor decisions; they are working with limited ability to predict how a specific individual will respond. Beyond the clinical danger, this also strains healthcare resources and delays effective treatment. The good news is that a new technological development, “the digital twins,” may begin to change this. Researchers are now building computer-based models that simulate how a specific patient’s body — or even individual organs and cells — may respond to treatment. Using clinical data, laboratory information, and biological characteristics, these virtual models allow scientists to test how a medicine behaves before it is given in real life. Instead of learning only after a patient reacts to a drug, healthcare may increasingly be able to anticipate those reactions. The significance is not only technological; it is clinical. If such tools become widely reliable, they could reduce trial-and-error prescribing, improve dosing decisions, and identify potential toxicity earlier. For medicines that carry higher risks — such as chemotherapy, complex chronic therapies, or treatments requiring careful monitoring — the potential impact is considerable. Developments like this are important because they point toward patient safety. Much of our work centres on strengthening how healthcare systems learn from real-world use of medicine: documenting adverse reactions, improving prescribing practices, and translating evidence into everyday care. Digital twin technologies reflect the same principle— using better information to prevent harm before it occurs. In essence, while pharmacovigilance often helps us learn from medicines after they are used, innovations such as digital twins can help healthcare providers learn before harm happens. While the technology is still emerging, it signals an important shift in medicine: moving from reacting to drug safety problems to predicting them. If successful, it could help clinicians choose therapies with greater confidence and allow patients to receive treatment that is not only effective but also safer. The promise is simple — a future where treatment decisions rely less on uncertainty and more on informed foresight. Although still in development and not yet part of routine clinical practice, these technologies signal a broader shift in healthcare — from reacting to treatment complications to anticipating them. Together with pharmacovigilance and careful prescribing, such tools may help clinicians make more informed decisions and improve patient safety.
Medicine Safety Insight
Why Medicines Can Harm the Kidneys The kidneys play a central role in removing many medicines from the body. When kidney function changes, drugs can accumulate to harmful levels even if the prescribed dose appears appropriate. In other cases, certain medicines directly affect kidney tissue, particularly when used for long periods or combined with other therapies. Problems often arise in routine clinical situations: a pain reliever added to multiple existing medicines, doses not adjusted for reduced kidney function, or interactions that increase drug concentration in the bloodstream. Because kidney injury is usually silent at first, patients may feel well while damage progresses. Medicine-related kidney injury, therefore, does not usually result from a single dramatic error. More commonly, it reflects gaps in monitoring, incomplete medication review, or delayed recognition of adverse drug reactions. Early consideration of medicines as a possible cause of clinical deterioration can allow clinicians to adjust treatment and prevent irreversible harm. Preventing these outcomes depends on careful prescribing, clear documentation, and routine review of therapy — ensuring that treatment remains both effective and safe for the individual patient.
Event Spotlight
World Kidney Day: Preventing Harm Before Intensive Care Observed each March globally Each March, the world observes World Kidney Day, drawing attention to the growing global burden of kidney disease. While public conversations often focus on dialysis and transplantation, an important and preventable pathway to kidney failure frequently begins much earlier: medicine-related kidney injury. Many kidney injuries do not begin with rare diseases. They begin with ordinary clinical situations — a pain reliever added to an already complex prescription, a missed drug interaction, an unadjusted dose, or an adverse drug reaction that goes unrecognised. These are not dramatic events; they are routine moments in healthcare. And when they are missed, the consequences accumulate slowly until the patient eventually presents with severe kidney damage. By the time intensive care is required, prevention has already been lost. At the Qua Pillar Health Research Foundation (QPHRF), our work focuses on stopping that trajectory early. We are a health research and capacity-building organisation dedicated to improving how medicines are used in real clinical practice across low- and middle-income settings, particularly in Africa. Our programs connect clinicians, pharmacists, researchers, regulators, and students around one central goal: patients should benefit from medicines without suffering avoidable harm. Kidney injury caused by medicines is one of the clearest examples of why this goal matters. Why Do Medicines Matter in Kidney Health? The kidneys process and eliminate many drugs from the body. When medicines are incorrectly dosed, combined in risky ways, or insufficiently monitored, the kidneys often become the first organ affected. What makes this dangerous is that kidney damage is usually silent. Patients may feel well while the injury progresses. This is why prevention is not simply a clinical preference — it is a necessity for patient safety. Our Approach: Alternatives to Intensive Care Our goal is upstream: strengthening the systems that prevent patients from needing intensive care in the first place. We support: 1. Pharmacovigilance — Learning from Harm Before It Repeats Through our pharmacovigilance trainings, professional workshops, and collaborations with healthcare institutions, we teach healthcare professionals how to recognise, document, and report adverse drug reactions. Pharmacovigilance is often misunderstood as paperwork. In reality, it is a patient-safety intelligence system. When adverse reactions are documented and analysed, patterns emerge. Those patterns help clinicians adjust prescribing practices, avoid risky drug combinations, and protect future patients. Simply put: every reported adverse reaction is an opportunity to prevent the next one. 2. Rational Medicine Use — Treating Without Creating New Illness A patient can receive the correct medicine and still be harmed if dosing, duration, or monitoring are inappropriate. Rational use of medicines is vital to ensure that medicines are prescribed only when necessary, in the right dose, for the right patient, with appropriate follow-up. In the context of kidney health, this matters enormously. Preventable drug-related kidney injury is not rare; it is often a systemic problem. When prescribing practices improve, kidney outcomes improve. The safest dialysis is the dialysis that never becomes necessary. 3. Clinical Responsibility and Team-Based Care Many medicine-related kidney injuries occur not because of a single error, but because responsibility is unclear. Who is monitoring? Who reviews the full medication list? Who recognises a reaction early? Our training emphasises shared accountability between doctors, pharmacists, nurses, and healthcare institutions. Better documentation, communication, and monitoring create safer care. Strong systems protect both patients and professionals. World Kidney Day reminds us that kidney health does not begin in nephrology clinics or intensive care units. It begins much earlier — in everyday prescribing decisions, medication monitoring, documentation, and communication among healthcare professionals. Dialysis and critical care remain essential and lifesaving, but they are responses to advanced disease. Preventing avoidable harm related to medicine ensures that fewer patients ever reach that stage. Improving how medicines are used is therefore not only a clinical priority, but a patient safety responsibility.